Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

[suicide_squeeze]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Rudy (dodgersfan).......thanks for the attempts, but the article you referred too also refers to players buying their own bats.

In both cases, it isn't clear on who is paying for them.

There are "team index" bats, and there are bats ordered by the players themselves, so we haven't accomplished anything here, except prove that it is probably both.

Again, I'm not sure it really matters who paid for the bat, or whose property it is when it goes flying into the stands.

The proper "etiquette" at that point is for the player to allow the fan to keep, in my opinion. If he insists on having it back, well all I say is I have yet to see a disagreeing fan sent away in the hands of security, banned from attending other games, or arrested for theft.

On a final note, did my best to put it in blck and white ver batim, and I believe I did an extremely accurate job. Think what you will......just please keep your window open to allow proper ventilation from all the smoke.

[Bobby Jenks]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Here is some other info from the internet.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070804185230AA09qje

Rudy

I know you did not just use Yahoo Answers as a source! I could see the teams buying PRO STOCK LVS bats or in the Marlins Farms, Rawlings Big Sticks, but no Marucci or Old Hickory.

[suicide_squeeze]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

I know you did not just use Yahoo Answers as a source! I could see the teams buying PRO STOCK LVS bats or in the Marlins Farms, Rawlings Big Sticks, but no Marucci or Old Hickory.

Thank you......I got a good laugh out of that, myself.

But Bobby, Rudy is a decent guy and he meant well. And some of the links he posted are accurate in his points. He did a good job of backing up his comments. Maybe a couple others here could follow his lead?

[chakes89]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Glad I missed my stories today

The show on here today has been better

More Drama and fewer implants (Hopefully )

[xpress34]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Wow!

8 Pages of this so far....

I will try to keep an even keel here and not try to offend anyone's sensibilities...

1st off - I have to disagree with the use of the word THEFT by many here

2nd - I have to disagree with the use of the terms 'My Right to Keep' and the others...

3rd - (this may have already been addressed - edits?) Some players DO BUY their own bats. Some are purchased by the teams...

That said, as some of you know, I have worked for Nike, Rawlings, and even for/at Coors Field and have been fortunate enough to meet and get to know some players over the years...

I have been to about 1/3 of the MLB stadiums and have seen various conduct with 'tossed' bats... some stadiums let you keep it, some come to retrieve it, and some let the player make the call... but I have as yet to see or hear ANY Stadium make an announcement - other than in reference to BALLS - about keeping any items leaving the playing field. I believe that MLB writes the 'Legal Copy' that is announced at each park to make sure their is continuity in the MLB.

Should you be able to keep the bat? My belief is YES, by all means, but I understand if a player wants it back - but NOT the way the Red Sox handled it. Is it your RIGHT to keep the bat? Nothing has ever been printed or stated that I have seen that confirms that. Is it THEFT if you don't want to give it back - absolutely not... as was previously stated, you had no intent, NOR did you commit an act that caused the item to come into your possession other than protecting yourself and possibly those around you. Unfortunately, it's a sticky situation and MY suggestion would be to check with each park you attend a game at to see what the 'ground rules' are at their park. In case some of you don't know, that is part of what happens at home plate when line-ups are exchanged - the umpires and managers discuss the 'ground rules' for the park - i.e. with all the new park designs, what exactly constitutes a HR in certain parst of the park... such as the Rox vs the Phils in 2007 in Phillie and the 'doubles' that were called because of the 'flower boxes' in front of the stands. At that time, the ball had to clear the fence behind the flower box to be a HR even though it 'left the yard' and was deposited in the flower bed.

As far as Players buying their own stuff... many do. If a player has the team order a 'team index' or 'standard' model bat with their name and such on it fromone of the Big Boys (LVS. Rawlings. Mizuno), YES - the team usually foots the bill. If the player wants a special made bat or custom made from one of the Specialty makers (Diablo, Kissimee, Hickory, etc) they will usually have to pay for it themselves.

While working for Rawlings, I hand turned a matched pair of bats for Clint Barmes (1 for him and 1 for me to have him sign). He told me that if I can get MLB certified, he would sign with me and pay me to make his bats. Just because a maker is MLB Certified doesn't mean the team will purchase from them for the player. During the same conversation, I asked Clint about a jersey 9this was his rookie year in 2005) and he told me he could get meone, but he would need a check made out to the Rockies as they charge players for any uniform items that they give away... the uniforms are NOT the players - they belong to the team since the team purchases them. There are exceptions to this rule as well - Nolan ryan purchased his own Game uniforms from Goodman & Sons instead of wearing the Rawlings and Russell unis that the Rangers and Astros and Angels provided.

So, what is the point of all of this???

The point is that the bats may belong to the team, or they may belong to the PLAYER and therefore, the whole 'Who owns a bat that goes into the stands?' question gets even more muddled...

Therefore, I stand by my statement that you should check with each stadium you attend just for clarification.

Just my .02

- Chris

[mattmueller]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Squeeze:

Unfortunately, I can tell from your response that you in fact have not read the Bonds ball decision. If you had, you would have a) broadened your educational horizons a bit with what was not a bad read, and b) it would have been clear to you why that case is 100% relevant to the subject at hand. With that, and given that I am a nice guy who tries to help when I can, let me try to drop a little knowledge. A Cliff's notes of the case if you will. As always, I would value any constructive feedback as to where I may interpret the following incorrectly, or have a bad recollection of the facts (I have not read the documents referenced below in some time, but I believe my understanding is correct).

In the Bonds case, the key element that the court had to decide before determining which of the fans who claimed the ball as their property, was to determine if, and then at what point the ball ceased to become the property of MLB (in this case MLB because MLB provided the special DNA-linked balls). The key legal principle discussed and used in the findings in the legal brief by Judge Murphy (I think that was his name) in determining the ball became the property of the guy who came up with it was that of intentional abandonment. That means, MLB and its teams, based on prior actions and codification, has a history of not claiming balls as their property once it reached the stands. Therefore, a reasonable person would believe that once a ball reaches the stands, it has been intentionally abandoned by its prior owner, and ball becomes the property of the person who possessed it. From there the court looked at many different arguments as to which fan would keep the ball, which for our purposes is not relevant.

The key take away here is that the only reason the ball was deemed to have property transfered was because of the legal theory of intentional abandonment. In the judge's findings, he cites a legal note / paper (can't recall who wrote it), that discussed in detail the transfer of property in ball parks, history of it, violation, etc. It is this piece that the court found to provide the legal groundwork and precedent to rule for the Bonds case, and therefore with its use, provided case law for future similar matters, including bats, helmets, jeseys... anything else.

So what does this mean. Balls into the stands are deemed to be the property of the person who possesses it. Why? Because team/MLB has consistently not enforced its ownership rights, aka they have intentionally abandoned the ball. For all other items, given there is no codification (through signs, disclaimers on tickets, scoreboards etc saying "you can keep bats") if the owner asks for it back, the property remains with its owner - the team / player. So, if you insist on taking it, without the owner's permission, you are taking somebody else's property. That is theft.

Thank you for reading the whole thing.

Matt

[suicide_squeeze]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

First off, Chris (xpress34), thanks for the wonderful post, loaded with great little facts of what has been discussed....bnacked up by personal experience. This again is why it's so cool to be involved with this site.

I totally agree with you in every aspect of what you said. Even the part about you disagreeing with "My right to keep" part...

My whole argument is based on what I believed would be the outcome every single time if the fan who caught the bat coming his way in a flurry.......would just convincingly say "I caught it! I saved myself and everyone around me from injury, I think the least you guys can do is let me keep the bat." I believe 99.9% of the time, it would end that way.

I can't believe what this whole thread turned into. One little heated discussion goes south and turns into an argument.

And matt......you are a nice guy. Thank you fro taking the time to type your interpretation of the legal findings. You were correct in everything you stated.

But partner, I already knew all that. Honestly. And they were doing their due diligence in the legal process by properly laying the foundation for their final judgement. But again, I truly believe there is no relevance in this portion of the case to what we are talking about. Because we are not talking about what would happen if this went to court......we are talking about the decency and etiquette of a professional organization and player, who after putting a fan at risk, would have the odacity to then rip the "souvenir" from the hands of the fan like what happened in Boston.

But we all know how those Bostonians are.......

I do see your point, and your argument, Matt, and I have to say.....

on this thread, the award goes to Chris because his thread seems to have summarized the whole discussion as to what I really believe ALL of us think......It depends on what park your in, and which player it is.......and what happened when the bat flew into the crowd......and possibly what form of acceptance or lack there-of the fan who ends up with the bat takes in regards to returning it.

Congrats Chris......

[dodgersfan]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

I tried.

Rudy

I know you did not just use Yahoo Answers as a source! I could see the teams buying PRO STOCK LVS bats or in the Marlins Farms, Rawlings Big Sticks, but no Marucci or Old Hickory.

[mattmueller]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Squeeze:

You are now pushing it back to whether or not its a good PR move for the Sox to be so publicly aggressive in the defense of their property. Setting that aside, I will assume you are truthful in you statement that you were 100% familiar with the Bonds case, and ignore that it would seem odd for that to be true and then for you still repeatedly indicate that you wanted somebody to prove to you legally what you can't steal a bat. Anyhow, what happened in court has 100% ramifications for a bat incident. As I would be pretty sure there is no law anywhere that says "if you take a bat, it is theft", just because its pretty narrow and unique circumstances. So when you are on trial after being arrested for theft after taking a bat, the prosecution will demonstrate you stole the bat using the laws discussed above and if you have a good defense counsel, they will also likely try to make similar claims to it was abandoned property, you possess it, therefore you own it and no theft. That is how the legal system works, judicial branch interprets and rules on legislative system.

Anyhow, with that said and if you don't see it, I am done. As the great Flavor Flav said, I can't do nothin for you man.

Matt

[BMH]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

All of his bats are purchased by the team except the dozen I gave him during ST.

[godwulf]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

... but I have as yet to see or hear ANY Stadium make an announcement - other than in reference to BALLS - about keeping any items leaving the playing field.

It's not a Major League venue, but - especially as I just got ahold of the 2009 Arizona Fall League schedule, and that's where my head is at the moment - I just thought I would mention that at Phoenix Muni, where the Desert Dogs play, and the Oakland A's do Spring Training, they do specifically mention, in the PA announcements, that "fans are welcome to keep any balls or bats that go into the stands". The other ballparks in the League may do it, too, I'm not certain.

[whatupyos]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

It's not a Major League venue, but - especially as I just got ahold of the 2009 Arizona Fall League schedule, and that's where my head is at the moment - I just thought I would mention that at Phoenix Muni, where the Desert Dogs play, and the Oakland A's do Spring Training, they do specifically mention, in the PA announcements, that "fans are welcome to keep any balls or bats that go into the stands". The other ballparks in the League may do it, too, I'm not certain.

Glad you brought that up because they do that at the Oakland A's games as well.

Aaron

[hblakewolf]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Glad you brought that up because they do that at the Oakland A's games as well.

Aaron

Aaron-

And before this thread takes a "legal" twist, see this:


Tie #1: In Sweeney v. Bettendorf, an eight year old girl in the stands at a professional minor league baseball game in Iowa was injured when a player lost control of his bat which traveled 120 feet and struck her in the head.

Tara Sweeney was on a field trip organized by her city parks department. Her injury case against the city was initially tossed out by the trial judge but an appeals court has now ruled (5-2) that the case may proceed to trial because the city had a duty to protect the child's safety at the ballpark and that a jury could find that parks employees put her in an unreasonably hazardous location to watch the game.

• Lamenting this type of all too frequent lawsuit, Walter Olson at Overlawyered declares: "This time in Iowa."
• And writing for the Des Moines Register, Jared Strong quotes a dissenting judge: "There is no joy on this day around Iowa's ballparks."
• My prediction: defense verdict at trial.

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@comcast.net

[suicide_squeeze]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Squeeze:

You are now pushing it back to whether or not its a good PR move for the Sox to be so publicly aggressive in the defense of their property. Setting that aside, I will assume you are truthful in you statement that you were 100% familiar with the Bonds case, and ignore that it would seem odd for that to be true and then for you still repeatedly indicate that you wanted somebody to prove to you legally what you can't steal a bat. Anyhow, what happened in court has 100% ramifications for a bat incident. As I would be pretty sure there is no law anywhere that says "if you take a bat, it is theft", just because its pretty narrow and unique circumstances. So when you are on trial after being arrested for theft after taking a bat, the prosecution will demonstrate you stole the bat using the laws discussed above and if you have a good defense counsel, they will also likely try to make similar claims to it was abandoned property, you possess it, therefore you own it and no theft. That is how the legal system works, judicial branch interprets and rules on legislative system.

Anyhow, with that said and if you don't see it, I am done. As the great Flavor Flav said, I can't do nothin for you man.

Matt

OK matt....

I'm man enough to admit that, essentially, if a bat comes into the stands and you catch it, that there may be a "right" for either the player, or a proper representative from the team to come back and ask for it.

But you need to understand it is obvious that there are different policies regarding this event (a bat flying into the crowd) in different parks.

In NONE of the cases would I ever expect a player, or a team or it's rep, to cry "theft" in the event a fan has a hold on it and won't let it go. We have had many posts here that have painted the picture of what exactly the case is. They're all different, with different ownership rights, and different circumstances. But they also have similarities. And it's my contention that one common theme during this event is that the fan is usually caught off guard.

My argument from the beginning has been....if it comes into the crowd, it's YOURS! Even though, legally, you appear to be correct that the bat is owned by either the player or the team (and thanks Brian H. for sounded in!!!), I would still argue that it would be a cold day in hell before any team or player would ever take it much past the first few moments of a fan laying his/her claim.....er.....desire.......to keep a fat that accidentally flew into his direction. The bad PR the team (or player) would endure wouldn't be worth it. To take it to the level of "theft" is laughable.

The situation we have been speaking of historically appears to be best handled by the team and/or player obliging to give up the bat to the fan. Never once have I heard any talk of "theft". That just seems silly....it's a baseball game with the paying public who supports the teams/players. A bat.....they got to give it up as a souvenir in those few and far between incidents where the player accidentally loses his grip and it ends up in the seats.

Are we cool?

[suicide_squeeze]

Re: Fan in Boston gets g/u bat taken away

Aaron-

And before this thread takes a "legal" twist, see this:


Tie #1: In Sweeney v. Bettendorf, an eight year old girl in the stands at a professional minor league baseball game in Iowa was injured when a player lost control of his bat which traveled 120 feet and struck her in the head.

Tara Sweeney was on a field trip organized by her city parks department. Her injury case against the city was initially tossed out by the trial judge but an appeals court has now ruled (5-2) that the case may proceed to trial because the city had a duty to protect the child's safety at the ballpark and that a jury could find that parks employees put her in an unreasonably hazardous location to watch the game.

• Lamenting this type of all too frequent lawsuit, Walter Olson at Overlawyered declares: "This time in Iowa."
• And writing for the Des Moines Register, Jared Strong quotes a dissenting judge: "There is no joy on this day around Iowa's ballparks."
• My prediction: defense verdict at trial.

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@comcast.net

"Overlawyered" is a good term......I like it.

But Howard, just look at all of those "thieves" ready to pounce on their game used collectible that, obviously, all those greedy b@st@rds came to the park for!! After it lands......and it is removed from between the 4th and 5th rib of the lucky recipient, they had dare better not argue with security when they approach for the wooden spear that they want the darn thing, because BY GOD the team and player have ownership rights to IT!!! (Just playing with you, matt)

I think we've all learned something from this post.

A) Team representatives in Boston are as miserable as the 86 year curse.

B) The place to go if you are seeking a game used bat for a souvenir is either Anahiem Stadium, or any one of a dozen or so minor league affiliates that state so on their premises.

Everywhere else?......


"From my cold, dead hands, baby!"